Wednesday, January 13, 2010

McCallum's Answer Was Crystal Clear

And presumably any Parliamentary investigation into the detainee issue would be focused upon the behavior of the political players involved. If the Harper Government truly believes that malfeasance on the part of any of these players entails the guilt of our troops in Afghanistan, then let them be the ones to make that argument and pursue the consequences.

As to the behavior of Canada's military in this whole affair, it seems to have been in line with the high professionalism we expect of our soldiers. The detainee "problem" was raised within the ranks (and in our diplomatic core, and elsewhere) and our civilian leaders were informed. The outgoing Martin government did not act, and the incoming Harper government did not act quickly enough.

Again, if there's more to it than that, let Ezra and the gang lead the witch-hunt.

56 comments:

Doesn't surprise me that it was during an interview with Meharchand, she's the biggest redneck shill in the network. I admit there are some reporters within the CBC with more of a left-wing bias, but they at least try to keep it hidden. Meharchand might as well sit (sorry stand, new CBC-NN don’t you know) behind the anchor desk wearing a “Common Sense Revolution” t-shirt.

As for the actual interview, what part of ”It’s the government” did the Reformatories not get?

With the speed that the email come out after the interview, the CONs are certainly trying to mislead the public and deflect the issue away from the government. For them to accuse the Liberals of blaming the military, is reprehensible.

Unlawful orders if given to the front line regarding the Detainee Policy Liberals 2001-2006)?

Revised Detainee Policy 2007-Present?

The military has transferred prisoners from 2001-Present. When did the Policy supersede unlawful orders?

The U.S. and the UK led the aerial bombing campaign, with ground forces supplied primarily by the Afghan Northern Alliance. In 2002, American, British and Canadian infantry were committed, along with special forces from several allied nations. Later, NATO troops were added. The U.S. military calls the conflict Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF).

Again, CS, the Tories are free to pursue that line of reasoning. A parliamentary inquiry would be concerned with what members of the Martin and Harper govs. did or didn't do. If the Tories want to EXPAND this to include the behavior of the military...well, perhaps Mr. harper can make that suggestion.

Yow know perfectly well what is meant by that comment. You know perfectly well the evidence says the government was told about the risk of torture, did nothing about it, and is now trying to cover it up.

It is clear McCallum is referring to the government, mostly because he SAYS he is referring to the government.

The fact is that NO ONE is blaming the troops for their actions. The truly despicable people in this debate are the ones who would run and hide behind the troops as a means to exonerate the Harper government from their failure to take responsibility for their own failure in this whole mess.

It is about time you Harper groupies grow up a bit and hold the man accountable for things. The fact you would be willing to throw our brave men and women under the bus in order to protect Harper is about as low as you can get.

A Parliamentary investigation is not a court of law. If the Harper Tories think that anything uncovered about failures in government policy means our troops committed war crimes, then they can make those legal arguments. I hope they do.

Not investigating isn't going to change what happened. It's going to clarifiy the situation -- in the same way peeking into the box finally make it clear that Schrodinger's cat isn't both alive and dead, it's one or the other.

Not knowing -- isn't that like diving your head in the sand like an ostrich?

With the amount of obfuscation that the government's engaged it, I don't think they're trying to protect the troops as much as they're trying to cover their own butts.

BCL. Don't forget the Liberal Government put safeguards into that agreement in order to protect detainees from torture. The fact those safeguards were not sufficient did not become apparent until Harper was PM.

The only issue the opposition is concerned about is when the current government learned about this risk, and why they decided to ignore it. The only issue the CPC is concerned about is how they can escape responsibility for their actions. So far their strategy has been to hide behind the troops. Now it looks like MacKay might have to take some heat too. They sure do like their scapegoats.

Are you suggesting the Generals, front lines call the government for advice on how to conduct the war?

Wait, so the military is now independent of the government? Great, all we need is a coup d'etat (not that we've been having much luck with democracy lately).

Hey, did you know the Commander-in-Chief of the military is the Queen with the duties given to the Governor General... so really the Libs are trying to smear Queen Elizabeth and Michaëlle Jean. Happy now?

Democracy is not under threat from a 17 day delay from the cheap seats returning to mount their fake protest and anger.

APEC and War Measures Act implementation are two examples of our democracy under threat compliments of Liberal majorities.

Using prorogue to stop Sheila Fraser Adscam Report, Somailia..those are examples of abuse of prorogue.

The Head of state is the Queen, the head of Government is the PM and I clearly understand the difference.

I can provide links regarding the role and duties including our military.

The theory in Lib blogs is you can smear the current government and exclude the military.

I have said you can't. Can you provide me with an example how you can allege the Government is guilty of war crimes, cover up, (should have know of torture of detainees) and not hold the military for their capture and transfer.

The gov't decides (line) does not work.

If you like we can talk about ISAF Policy, and how the Liberals failed to plan, support our military with this mission. The Liberals did not trust our American allies and refused to hand them over to the Americans who set up their own prisons. (We would have had improved visitations?)

An article appearing in the April 28, 2007 issue of La Presse (which can be translated here), it was noted that the Liberal government of Paul Martin was warned on numerous occasions spanning 2003-05 that torture commonly occurred in Afghan prisons.

Prior to 2005, Canadian forces in Afghanistan transferred their detainees to American forces operating in Afghanistan. In response to the abuses taking place at Guantanamo Bay, however, the Liberal government decided to instead transfer prisoners to Afghan authorities.

He seems to believe if he repeats himself over and over again, his nonsense will magically come true.

I give him/her (which is it now?) more credit than that. The wingnuts know they're just distracting people with their nonsense, derailing other people's discussions and amplifying the talking points so that, later on, people only remember what they read/heard the most, if they remember anything at all (which works for them as well).

In a sense, you're correct though. For the Right, it doesn't matter what's true. It's what people believe.

Perhaps Rae could get some of his Tamil Tiger pals to fill out a protest march or perhaps some of the Hezbollah folks. I'm sure the average Canadian would love to see those banned flags in a march to demand a military investigation. Whatever happened to Michael Ignatieff and his praise of the US or his support of the Manley report. Sad small town cheap politics.

Although it really is beneath me to even comment on this, but just to dispel your point with the delightful trip down memory lane in regards to the FLQ crisis; the WMA was wildly popular at the time and fully supported by Robert Stanfield and the Tories (though he later wrote he regretted the decision). In fact some of the biggest support came from the west, where the popular opinion was that Trudeau should go further and have the RCMP begin to round up all the pot-smoking hippies and anti-US Vietnam War protesters while they were at it. I personally remember a cartoon lampooning this view published in the Star.

From wikipedia:Opinion polls in Quebec and the rest of Canada showed overwhelming support for the War Measures Act; in a December 1970 Gallup Poll, it was noted that 89% of English-speaking Canadians supported the introduction of the War Measures Act, and 86% of French-speaking Canada supported its introduction.

You see, hindsight is always 20/20. Looking back its easy to judge that the actual numbers within the FLQ were very small, and the suspension of civil liberties was unjustified in that light. However at the time the FLQ manifesto warned of ”100,000 revolutionary workers, armed and organized” and there was no way of the RCMP being able to determine any real number. Canada Post boxes blowing up and police finding Pierre Laporte dead in a trunk were discomforting events as well.

Do you enjoy engaging in a debate when you know nothing of the subject? A simple 10 second Google search got me:

”One of the first FLQ bombings happened on the streets of Montreal, it all started when the FLQ placed bombs in 17 mailboxes. One of those mailboxes was own by an army demolition expert, the bomb blew up in his face, he didn't die but he had to fight for his life for a long period of time. The rash of explosions started at 3am.”

I suggest you learn something on the topic before you debate anyone. For record 8 people died from FLQ bombings between 1963 - 1970. Targets included English owned businesses, banks, McGill University and the homes of prominent English speakers. In 1963 they bombed the Canadian Army Recruiting Centre in Montreal, killing Sgt. Wilfred V. O'neil. They bombed the window well of the National Defence Headquarters on Lisgar St in Ottawa, Ontario. That explosion killed a cleaning lady. They also set off a bomb in a mailbox next to a Canadian Tire store on Wellington St in Ottawa. On February 13, 1969 the FLQ set off a powerful bomb that ripped through the Montreal Stock Exchange causing massive destruction and seriously injuring twenty-seven people. They also attempted bombing mayor Drapeau’s house in Montreal, the bomb was hidden in a toilet.

Why do you hate our soldiers CanadianSense?Why won’t you let our government protect them adequately?Why do you support terrorists and wish our businesses, banks, schools and government officials to be bombed?

That is my answer for the rest of your rambling, stop trying to put words in my mouth CS …’cause you really suck at it.

Your are too young having not lived through it. I should have used a mor recent example my bad.

It was nice of you to spend a few minutes trying to understand what happened through google.

So what is the total of killed? How many charged and convicted?

Tommy Douglas was right to not support the undemocratic move by invoking the War Measures Act.

Try going deeper than google next time. This was NOT a national emergency or an insurrection as alleged by the Liberals in government. It was a responsibility of the local law enforcement to do their job.

I should have used APEC it would have been easier for you to understand. oh well.

Best of luck with calling a debate throwing personal insults in every post.